President Yoon Suk Yeol’s impeachment and suspension from office have left South Korea, a key ally of the United States, without a strong elected leader to address pressing issues such as a hostile North Korea and increasing domestic political polarization.
The National Assembly voted to impeach Mr. Yoon on Saturday, signaling a significant vote of no confidence in a leader whose popularity had waned throughout his term. Outside the legislature, celebrations erupted as citizens marked Mr. Yoon’s peaceful removal, which occurred shortly after his controversial declaration of martial law.
However, the political instability and uncertainty stemming from Mr. Yoon’s failed attempt to impose military rule remain unresolved. His impeachment has created a leadership vacuum, with Prime Minister Han Duck-soo stepping in as interim leader, though he lacks an electoral mandate. A new government cannot be established until the Constitutional Court determines whether to reinstate or formally remove Mr. Yoon.
The court's deliberations may take up to six months. In a previous case involving President Park Geun-hye in 2016, the court took three months to reach a decision. Currently, the nine-member court faces the additional challenge of three vacancies. The National Assembly is expected to appoint three justices in the coming days, with only two of the existing justices having been appointed by Mr. Yoon's predecessor, Moon Jae-in.
If Mr. Yoon is formally ousted, South Korea would require an additional two months to conduct a presidential election. Mr. Yoon has vowed to “never give up” his fight to return to office, but he is also under investigation for charges including insurrection, which could lead to his arrest. Prosecutors have requested his presence for questioning, but he did not attend.
The impeachment bill accused Mr. Yoon of insurrection for declaring martial law and sending troops to the National Assembly to prevent a vote against his decree. Several senior officials in the government, police, and military have been arrested for their roles in supporting his actions.
This political turmoil complicates South Korea's ability to engage with the incoming administration of Donald J. Trump, who has criticized the U.S.-South Korea alliance and threatened to impose higher costs on South Korea for U.S. military presence.
As interim leader, Mr. Han faces the challenge of maintaining government functionality during this crisis. Despite his extensive bureaucratic experience, he lacks political authority as the prime minister is not an elected position. Legal experts and opposition lawmakers have questioned the legitimacy of his role, given his connection to Mr. Yoon’s martial law declaration.
Mr. Han is perceived as a stabilizing caretaker rather than a dynamic leader, contrasting with Mr. Yoon’s impulsive style. He has already taken steps to ensure military readiness and reaffirm the importance of the U.S.-South Korea alliance in communications with President Biden.
The main opposition Democratic Party initially threatened to impeach Mr. Han but later retracted this threat, proposing a consultative body to stabilize the country and urging the Constitutional Court to expedite its decision. Party leader Lee Jae-myung is currently favored in a potential presidential election.
In a recent speech, Mr. Yoon expressed his determination to fight against his impeachment, a statement interpreted as rallying support among his right-wing base. His administration had previously garnered praise internationally for strengthening ties with the U.S. and Japan, but his domestic tenure has been marred by allegations of corruption and conflicts with the opposition.
Many South Koreans prefer to endure temporary political uncertainty rather than retain a president perceived as damaging the country’s democratic image. Analysts suggest that Mr. Yoon’s martial law declaration has undermined his foreign policy achievements and raised concerns about the commitment of South Korean conservative elites to democratic principles.
“He blew away his foreign policy achievements — which could have been his most important legacy — through his self-destructing terror,” noted a political analyst.